GUEST EDITORIAL
Robin J. Wilson,1,2 Heather Moulden,2,3 Drew A. Kingston,4 Liam Marshall5,6
1 Wilson Psychology Services LLC, Sarasota, United States of America; 2 Department of Psychiatry and Behavioural Neurosciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada; 3 Forensic Psychiatry Program, St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, Hamilton, Canada; 4 HOPE Program, Hayward, United States of America; 5 Department of Forensic Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; 6 Rockwood Psychotherapy & Consulting, Midland, Canada
Cite: Wilson, R. J., Moulden, H., Kingston, D. A., & Marshall, L. (2025). Beyond the headlines: Bridging the divide between public perception and policy. International Journal of Risk and Recover, 7(1), 3-5. https://www.forensicpsychiatryinstitute.com/beyond-the-headlines-bridging-the-divide-between-public-perception-and-policy/
There is no denying that the public has a morbid fascination with forensic mental health. The popularity of film and television portrayals of individuals with psychiatric difficulties engaging in varying degrees of interpersonal violence and destruction (e.g., Criminal Minds, Forensic Files, The Silence of the Lambs) continues to be a strong influence on public views of mental health, crime, and punishment.
High-profile cases also influence public perspectives of mental health and crime, including an individual who beheaded another passenger on a bus; a couple who kidnapped, sexually tortured, and murdered teenage girls; and a man who drove his van down a crowded city sidewalk.
However, when public opinions, fuelled by sensational media, begin to influence political platforms and government policy, do we have reasonable cause for concern?
Although there are certainly examples of individuals engaging in serious criminal conduct as a byproduct of mental illness, the literature strongly suggests that individuals with psychiatric conditions are not typically dangerous (Applebaum et al., 2000; Bonta et al., 2014; Peterson et al., 2014; Harris et al., 2015). Indeed, in many cases, being mentally ill may represent a protective factor — something that reduces risk.
Because the public typically derive most of its knowledge and understanding of mental health from the popular media or sensationalized accounts, even individuals with mental health conditions can be confused about what the implications may be for their own treatment and future well-being. Moreover, when one individual with a mental health condition engages in dangerous behaviour, all individuals with mental health conditions are subsequently viewed with suspicion. The stigma attached to mental illness is a major factor in preventing afflicted individuals from getting the help and support they need.
For forensic mental health practitioners, the challenge has always been to appropriately assess their clients’ risks and needs, apply evidence-based treatment methods, and monitor clients’ progress through various risk management frameworks. They do this while keeping risk in mind, to themselves and to others. To achieve this goal, practitioners rely on research to answer important questions.
Fortunately, high-quality research projects continue to provide practitioners and clients with important information regarding the factors contributing to mental health difficulties and new therapeutic techniques to manage symptoms. However, a disconnect exists between the expert knowledge generated by researchers and its application to clinical practice and forensic evaluative policies. Morris and colleagues (2011) found that it takes on average of 17 years for research results to influence clinical practice. As a result, many clients receive interventions that clinicians think are helpful but are based on outdated, or worse, ineffective practice (refer to Barnao & Ward, 2015). In the information age, surely, we can do better.
It is an unfortunate reality that mental health and violence are frequently seen as being inextricably linked. In the United States, gun violence (e.g., mass shootings) is often portrayed as a mental health problem. In those and other similar situations, mental health is all too often poorly defined or explained, which increases the likelihood of scapegoating individuals with mental illness. Actually, not every individual with a mental health condition engages in criminal conduct, and not all crimes committed by individuals with mental health conditions are directly related to that condition.
There is often a complex interaction between mental health and involvement in crime, particularly violent crime (Peterson et al., 2014). The disconnect between reality and popular perspective has proven to be hazardous for both afflicted clients and the community at large. For example:
- How should the criminal justice system respond to an individual with a diagnosable psychiatric condition who has committed a crime, even a serious one?
- Should all individuals who sexually offend be imprisoned for life based on the flawed perspectives that their chances of rehabilitation or misunderstandings about the risks they may pose in the future?
- What implications are there for forensic psychiatric evaluation, application of responsive treatment methods, and opportunities for self-determination for individuals with neurodevelopmental disorders who stray into criminal conduct?
With the above introduction to the issues in mind, the main purpose of this editorial is to announce a new partnership between the Forensic Psychiatry Research Network (FPRN) at McMaster University and partners. This collaboration was developed to share important, science-based information about forensic mental health among forensic researchers, practitioners, clients, and relevant community agencies and organizations. The aim is to increase knowledge and capacity.
This will be a multi-modal partnership that includes a series of articles written by FPRN members published in this issue of the International Journal of Risk and Recovery. Our aim is to highlight the issues associated with knowledge transfer with other practitioners regarding neurodevelopmental disorders (Mela et al., 2025), sexual violence prevention (Wilson & Moulden, 2025), and the link between psychiatric illness and dangerousness (Mamak & Chaimowitz, 2025). We chose these topics because they represent examples of some of the most sensationalized domains of violence, which capture the attention of the public and ultimately mislead the transfer of empirical science to practice.
An important part of this partnership will be making connections with other partners. These connections will include building a website dedicated to information sharing on various fronts, including fact sheets, white papers, instructional videos, and a forum in which participants may link with one another. Through this collaboration, it is our sincere hope that all groups will become more familiar with the issues associated with forensic mental health. Sharing information will lead to greater capacity for practitioners to provide up-to-date, evidence-based practices; more informed policy and decision making at the systems level; better care and support for clients and their families; and a better informed public. A natural consequence of such greater capacity and support will be that risk — to the individual with a mental health condition and the community at large — will be reduced.
References
Applebaum, P. S., Robbins, P. C., & Monahan, K. (2000). Violence and delusions: Data from the MacArthur Violence Risk Assessment Study. American Journal of Psychiatry, 157(4), 566–572. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.157.4.566
Barnao, M., & Ward, T. (2015). Sailing uncharted seas without a compass: A review of interventions in forensic mental health. Aggression and Violent Behaviour, 22, 77–86.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2015.04.009
Bonta, J., Blais, J., & Wilson, H. A. (2014). A theoretically informed meta-analysis of the risk for general and violent recidivism for mentally disordered offenders. Aggression and Violent Behaviour, 19(3), 278–287.
Harris, G. T., Rice, M. E., Quinsey, V. L., & Cormier, C. A. (2015). Violent offenders: Appraising and managing risk, Third Edition. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Mamak, M., & Chaimowitz, G. (2025). Beyond the myths: Exploring the complex relationship between mental disorders and violence. International Journal of Risk and Recovery, 7(1): 29–36. https://www.forensicpsychiatryinstitute.com/journal/journal-articles/beyond-the-myths-exploring-the-complex-relationship-between-mental-disorders-and-violence
Mela, M., McLachlan, K., & Wilson, R. J. (2025). Promoting greater understanding and knowledge transfer to interestholders in discussions of neurodevelopmental disorders and the criminal justice system. International Journal of Risk and Recovery, 7(1): 6–17. https://www.forensicpsychiatryinstitute.com/promoting-greater-understanding-and-knowledge-transfer-to-interest-holders-in-discussions-of-neurodevelopmental-disorders-and-the-criminal-justice-system
Morris, Z.S., Wooding, S., & Grant, J. (2011). The answer is 17 years, what is the question: Understanding time lags in translational research. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 104, 510–520.
Peterson, J.K., Skeem, J., Kennealy, P., Bray, B., & Zvonkovic, A. (2014). How often and how consistently do symptoms directly precede criminal behaviour among offenders with mental illness? Law and Human Behaviour, 38, 439–449.
Wilson, R. J., & Moulden, H. M. (2025). Challenging common misperceptions associated with individuals who have sexually offended. International Journal of Risk and Recovery, 7(1): 18–28. https://www.forensicpsychiatryinstitute.com/journal/journal-articles/challenging-common-misperceptions-associated-with-individuals-who-have-sexually-offended